it's because there are pictures and there are pictures, thy. there is the picture that you take to capture their whole costume, or them in the costume, or their impersonation of the character. and there is the picture that you take to capture their cleavage, or their underwear, or whatever sexy, sexy fantasy you have about them.

i suspect most cosplayers wouldn't mind the first kind of picture, whether or not they are asked (and why wouldn't you ask to take that picture? they will probably pose for you, and you get an even better shot).

most humans _do_ mind the second kind of picture. which is why the people who want to take them will try to take them without asking. because they are doing something skeezy.

now maybe there are people who are ok with you taking skeezy pictures of them. if you ask, you find out and you all get into it. or, you know, someone tells you that they don't want you to take skeezy pictures of them, and then you don't take the picture. because that is showing some respect for that person's feelings.

and by the way, reporters absolutely do need to get your permission, and also your name, because if they publish your picture without your permission, they can get sued._________________aka: neverscared!
a flux of vibrant matter

A professional photographer will almost always ask your permission if they want to take a picture of just you, and if they're not from a news agency (which can print photos taken in public under editorial license) and intend to use the image commercially they'll have a model release form handy. If a venue is open to the public and photography isn't expressly prohibited (with signage), then anyone can legally take your picture under most circumstances. They can't use a hidden camera to shoot up your skirt, or otherwise invade expectations of privacy, but they can snap a picture of you in your costume. The general rule in a public space is "if you can see it you can shoot it."

But the legal issue is totally divorced from the ethical one. You may not be required to get consent to take pictures at a con, but any decent human being will._________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

A professional photographer will almost always ask your permission if they want to take a picture of just you, and if they're not from a news agency (which can print photos taken in public under editorial license) and intend to use the image commercially they'll have a model release form handy. If a venue is open to the public and photography isn't expressly prohibited (with signage), then anyone can legally take your picture under most circumstances. They can't use a hidden camera to shoot up your skirt, or otherwise invade expectations of privacy, but they can snap a picture of you in your costume. The general rule in a public space is "if you can see it you can shoot it."

But the legal issue is totally divorced from the ethical one. You may not be required to get consent to take pictures at a con, but any decent human being will.

Are you about to start a tirade about the ethics of looking at a person?

A professional photographer will almost always ask your permission if they want to take a picture of just you, and if they're not from a news agency (which can print photos taken in public under editorial license) and intend to use the image commercially they'll have a model release form handy. If a venue is open to the public and photography isn't expressly prohibited (with signage), then anyone can legally take your picture under most circumstances. They can't use a hidden camera to shoot up your skirt, or otherwise invade expectations of privacy, but they can snap a picture of you in your costume. The general rule in a public space is "if you can see it you can shoot it."

But the legal issue is totally divorced from the ethical one. You may not be required to get consent to take pictures at a con, but any decent human being will.

Are you about to start a tirade about the ethics of looking at a person?

Why is a photograph more sinister than a memory Dogen?

Because a photograph can end up all over the internet and a memory is stuck with one persons verbal description.

Basically because photographs can spread.

For the same reason that teacher was fired for being in a porn, once its on film it's forever.

For the same reason that porn site Is anybody Up was particularly horrible._________________

A professional photographer will almost always ask your permission if they want to take a picture of just you, and if they're not from a news agency (which can print photos taken in public under editorial license) and intend to use the image commercially they'll have a model release form handy. If a venue is open to the public and photography isn't expressly prohibited (with signage), then anyone can legally take your picture under most circumstances. They can't use a hidden camera to shoot up your skirt, or otherwise invade expectations of privacy, but they can snap a picture of you in your costume. The general rule in a public space is "if you can see it you can shoot it."

But the legal issue is totally divorced from the ethical one. You may not be required to get consent to take pictures at a con, but any decent human being will.

Are you about to start a tirade about the ethics of looking at a person?

Why is a photograph more sinister than a memory Dogen?

Because a photograph can end up all over the internet and a memory is stuck with one persons verbal description.

Basically because photographs can spread.

For the same reason that teacher was fired for being in a porn, once its on film it's forever.

For the same reason that porn site Is anybody Up was particularly horrible.

Imagine every moment of your life was photographed from every angle.

Are you so ashamed of your body, so afraid of the reactions of others upon looking at these images that you greatly wish to control how they are used?

Are you about to start a tirade about the ethics of looking at a person?

I wasn't, but I could if you'd like. I was making a relevant contribution about what constitutes legal photographing of other people, whereas the conversation was about the etiquette of such. They're distinct, and my post was (I thought clearly) about the legal, not the ethical. But you know me, I'm happy to toss out an idea on anything. Did you have a specific request for the ethics of looking at people rant?

Quote:

Why is a photograph more sinister than a memory Dogen?

I guess it depends how sinister your memory is... but all the women on those ex-girlfriend porn sites might have opinions about when photographs can become sinister._________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

Some people are ashamed. Some people have body issues. Seriously. Some people have annorexia, bulimia, OCD, depression, and all sorts of other things that aren't necessarily related - except that these things can factor into someone not wanting to be photographed without their permission.

Why is the need of a photographer so huge that they can't take a moment to ask permission? It's different when the person is in the background, but if they are the subject of a piece, it is a good thing to ask them first._________________::crisis mode::

A professional photographer will almost always ask your permission if they want to take a picture of just you, and if they're not from a news agency (which can print photos taken in public under editorial license) and intend to use the image commercially they'll have a model release form handy. If a venue is open to the public and photography isn't expressly prohibited (with signage), then anyone can legally take your picture under most circumstances. They can't use a hidden camera to shoot up your skirt, or otherwise invade expectations of privacy, but they can snap a picture of you in your costume. The general rule in a public space is "if you can see it you can shoot it."

But the legal issue is totally divorced from the ethical one. You may not be required to get consent to take pictures at a con, but any decent human being will.

Are you about to start a tirade about the ethics of looking at a person?

Why is a photograph more sinister than a memory Dogen?

Because a photograph can end up all over the internet and a memory is stuck with one persons verbal description.

Basically because photographs can spread.

For the same reason that teacher was fired for being in a porn, once its on film it's forever.

For the same reason that porn site Is anybody Up was particularly horrible.

Imagine every moment of your life was photographed from every angle.

Are you so ashamed of your body, so afraid of the reactions of others upon looking at these images that you greatly wish to control how they are used?

Here's the problem.

Images are just images. They cannot tell the whole story, and stories can be concoted around them, real, or false.

So yeah. I can see why people might not want, for instant, nude pictures of themselves sleeping circulating the internet.

"Look at this easy slut I just banged!"

And given that, well, a woman can get fired from her job for having once participated in porn? How one feels about their OWN body doesn't really matter. How other people react does, and there's a HUGE number of fuckers out their with massive, massive sticks up their rectums.

Or maybe some are afraid, or are camera shy, or *any number* of reasons. While I admit it did not initially occur to me (or.. maybe it did? My con experiences were so long ago, they're sorta a blur), I can understand why one would want permission before having their photo taken._________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger